Allahabad High Court
Smt. Nazmi Rizvi And Another vs Union Of India Thru. ... on 11 July, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1087 of 2022
Applicant :- Smt. Nazmi Rizvi And Another
Opposite Party :- Union Of India Thru. C.B.I./S.C.B. Lko And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohemmed Amir Naqvi,Abhishek Srivastava,Amjad Siddiqui,Nadeem Murtaza,Sudhanshu S. Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Nadeem Murtaza, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the C.B.I. as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case No.341 of 2022, arising out of FIR No. R.C.053 2021 S0002/2021, under Sections 120B, 409, 418, 419, 420, 467, 466, 471, 477-A IPC & 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act, 1988, Police Station- CBI/SCB, District Lucknow with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the co-accused person, namely, Kamal Ehsan, is stated to have embezzled an amount to the tune of Rs.24 crores.
Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants are not named in the FIR. Three charge-sheets were filed by the local police after detailed investigation and have not nominated the applicants. Later on, the investigation was handed over to the CBI, which after investigation has also filed charge-sheet against the applicants. Applicant no.1 is the wife of driver- Yavar Hussain of the main accused person- Kamal Ehsan. The applicant no.2 is the brother-in-law of Yavar Hussain. Learned counsel has further stated that they have nothing to do with the said offence. They have been falsely implicated in the present case. The offence, if any, made out against the applicants is that they have acted bona fidely and they had no knowledge of any transfer of money to and from their accounts. There is no criminal history of the applicants. Learned counsel has further stated the applicants have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in the trial also, failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail have been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the CBI. However, he could not dispute the said fact that the applicants are not named in the FIR and they are relatives of the driver- Yavar Hussain of the main accused- Kamal Ehsan, who has also been enlarged on regular bail by this Court.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 656". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants-Smt. Nazmi Rizvi and Syed Mohammad Sami be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
3. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
5. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
6. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.
Order Date :- 11.7.2022
Ravi Kant
